Automated corruption analysis of service designs

ABSTRACT

Methods and arrangements for conducting corruption analysis of service designs. A service design is accepted. Corrupting factors within the service design are assessed, and a corruption susceptibility score is generated. An alternative service design is generated responsive to a corruption susceptibility score fulfilling predetermined criteria.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.13/361,675, entitled AUTOMATED CORRUPTION ANALYSIS OF SERVICE DESIGNS,filed on Jan. 30, 2012, which is incorporated by reference in itsentirety.

BACKGROUND

In the realm of human-provided services, corruption often emerges as amajor issue to be dealt with, especially in the realm of publicservices. Systemic deficiencies such as lack of transparency, deficit ofinformation, weak accounting practices and obsolete policies, amongother deficiencies, have been known to lend themselves to an environmentwhich breeds different forms of corruption.

Several conventional tools and methods are available for assessingdeficiencies that result in corruption, but are found to be lacking inany of several respects. Subjective tools assess corruption throughopinion surveys and thus are highly susceptible to a surveyee's personalbias. Reactive tools involve assessments performed subsequent to knownacts of corruption and at best serve a corrective, rather thanpreventative, purpose. Some tools conduct assessments based oninstitutional diagnostics such as audits and focus mainly on loopholeson an administrative side. Thus, corruption taking place on the side ofbeneficiaries may well go undetected, rampant as it may be in aparticular case. Generally, conventional methods such as those justdescribed are mainly performed manually, with a general lack ofreliability thereby implied.

BRIEF SUMMARY

In summary, one aspect of the invention provides a method comprising:accepting a service design; assessing corrupting factors within theservice design; generating a corruption susceptibility score; andgenerating an alternative service design responsive to a corruptionsusceptibility score fulfilling predetermined criteria.

For a better understanding of exemplary embodiments of the invention,together with other and further features and advantages thereof,reference is made to the following description, taken in conjunctionwith the accompanying drawings, and the scope of the claimed embodimentsof the invention will be pointed out in the appended claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 schematically illustrates a system architecture.

FIG. 2 sets forth a process more generally for conducting corruptionanalysis of service designs.

FIG. 3 illustrates a computer system.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

It will be readily understood that the components of the embodiments ofthe invention, as generally described and illustrated in the figuresherein, may be arranged and designed in a wide variety of differentconfigurations in addition to the described exemplary embodiments. Thus,the following more detailed description of the embodiments of theinvention, as represented in the figures, is not intended to limit thescope of the embodiments of the invention, as claimed, but is merelyrepresentative of exemplary embodiments of the invention.

Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment” or “anembodiment” (or the like) means that a particular feature, structure, orcharacteristic described in connection with the embodiment is includedin at least one embodiment of the invention. Thus, appearances of thephrases “in one embodiment” or “in an embodiment” or the like in variousplaces throughout this specification are not necessarily all referringto the same embodiment.

Furthermore, the described features, structures, or characteristics maybe combined in any suitable manner in at least one embodiment. In thefollowing description, numerous specific details are provided to give athorough understanding of embodiments of the invention. One skilled inthe relevant art will recognize, however, that the various embodimentsof the invention can be practiced without at least one of the specificdetails, or with other methods, components, materials, et cetera. Inother instances, well-known structures, materials, or operations are notshown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of theinvention.

The description now turns to the figures. The illustrated embodiments ofthe invention will be best understood by reference to the figures. Thefollowing description is intended only by way of example and simplyillustrates certain selected exemplary embodiments of the invention asclaimed herein.

It should be noted that the flowchart and block diagrams in the figuresillustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possibleimplementations of systems, apparatuses, methods and computer programproducts according to various embodiments of the invention. In thisregard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent amodule, segment, or portion of code, which comprises at least oneexecutable instruction for implementing the specified logicalfunction(s). It should also be noted that, in some alternativeimplementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of theorder noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in successionmay, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks maysometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon thefunctionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of theblock diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocksin the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implementedby special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specifiedfunctions or acts, or combinations of special purpose hardware andcomputer instructions.

The disclosure now turns to FIG. 1. It should be appreciated that theprocesses, arrangements and products broadly illustrated therein can becarried out on or in accordance with essentially any suitable computersystem or set of computer systems, which may, by way of an illustrativeand non-restrictive example, include a system or server such as thatindicated at 12′ in FIG. 3. In accordance with an example embodiment,most if not all of the process steps, components and outputs discussedwith respect to FIG. 1 can be performed or utilized by way of aprocessing unit or units and system memory such as those indicated,respectively, at 16′ and 28′ in FIG. 3, whether on a server computer, aclient computer, a node computer in a distributed network, or anycombination thereof.

Broadly contemplated herein, in accordance with at least one embodimentof the invention, are systems and frameworks which can systematicallyanalyze formal service designs based on predefined rules and patterns toidentify the corruption loopholes within a service and accordinglyassign a corruptibility score (which can also be referred to as acorruption susceptibility score) to the design. The service designs areexpressed formally as business process workflows and design elementsbased on a service ontology and forms the basis of defining rules fordetection of corruption patterns. The service design ontology augmentsthe standard service ontology with a corruption profile.

In accordance with at least one embodiment of the invention, and asschematically illustrated in FIG. 1, an input service design isinspected to look for pre-defined corruption patterns and to detect,proactively, corruption-based loopholes. Design alternatives arethereupon proposed by the system by way of eliminating the loopholes andthus making the design less corruption-prone.

In accordance with at least one embodiment of the invention, input isreceived as an initial service design, from an individual servicedesigner 102, based on a formal service ontology and business processworkflow that needs to be assessed for corruption. Provided as output,then, is a corruption susceptibility score 104 that indicates a level ofcorruptibility of the input service design.

In accordance with at least one embodiment of the invention, acorruption assessment framework 106 includes several components. Acorruption pattern database 108 stores all identified corruptionpatterns in a well defined structured format. A policy database 110stores all the government policies and legal rules applicable to publicservices. It should be understood and appreciated that public servicesare presented herein by way of an illustrative and non-restrictiveexample. In accordance with embodiments of the invention, policies orrules applicable to other types of services can be stored and employed.A service design analyzer 112 then analyzes the input service designbased on the design elements of interest obtained from all thecorruption patterns and applicable policies. A corruption assessmentengine 114, for its part, is configured to comprehend the enhancedservice design ontology. Based on the values extracted for differentdesign elements and the rules obtained from the corruption patterns andapplicable policies, it identifies the patterns exhibited by the inputservice design. It then assigns a corruption susceptibility score 104 tothe input service design.

In accordance with at least one embodiment of the invention, analternative generator 116, based on a threshold defined for corruptionsusceptibility score, triggers the generation of at least onealternative service design. Such alternatives can also incorporatelearning from prior corrective measures stored in a historical database118, which stores the historical data that represent the correctivemeasures previously taken to improve the corruption susceptibility score104. Alternative generator 116 also consults the corruption patterndatabase 108 to develop a solution to be applied to matched patterns. Analternative service design then itself gets analyzed by analyzer 112 toensure or verify compliance with corruption resolution measures.Corrective measures can then be accepted by the service designer 102 tomake any design more robust. An individual serving as a service designer102 may also suggest feedback to the existing policies and identifiedcorruption patterns based on these alternatives.

In accordance with at least one embodiment of the invention, framework106 can execute its tasks automatically or with manual intervention.Particularly, in one variant, the framework 106 can automatically runrules on the input service design to match the corruption patterns andcalculate the degree of corruptibility in the design (via the corruptionsusceptibility score). In another variant, the framework 106 cansemi-automatically run the rules on the input service design supervisedby a human, to thereby match the corruption patterns and calculate thedegree of corruptibility in the design (via the corruptionsusceptibility score).

Numerous examples abound for applying embodiments of the invention. Inone illustrative working example, there may be a need to define clearand appropriate eligibility criteria for identifying entitledbeneficiaries of a public (or other) service. A corruption assessmentframework 106 can be used, then, when a targeted section of thepopulation enjoys the benefits of a public (or other) service,administered targeting rather than self-targeting is used forcategorizing and identification criteria are weak (i.e., are notverifiable and subject to multiple interpretations). The impetus heremay well be that inaccurate eligibility criteria can be plagued byerrors of both inclusion and exclusion, i.e., exclusion of citizensrighteously entitled to avail the service and inclusion of those who arenot.

In accordance with the above-stated working example, one factor in acorruption susceptibility score 104 can be that a targeted section ofthe population enjoys the benefits of the public (or other) service.This value can be 1. Another factor can be that administered targeting,rather than self-targeting is used for categorizing. This value,likewise, can be 1. Finally, another metric can arise from the strengthof identification criteria. Particularly, if criteria are not verifiableand subject to multiple interpretations, specific criteria can beassessed (e.g., land holdings, food security and sanitation, amongothers) with a determination as to what proportion of the criteria areweak and difficult to verify. By way of an illustrative example,criteria that include 0-5% with a definition of “weak” can yield afactor of 0, a showing of 5-30% weak criteria can yield 2, and thenvalues of 4, 6 and 8 can be yielded for the ranges of 30-50%, 50%-70%and 70%-100% of weak criteria, respectively. If, in accordance with anillustrative example, the value yielded in this step is 6, then thetotal corruption susceptibility score will be 8 (based on all threeconsidered factors).

In accordance with at least one embodiment of the invention, acorruption susceptibility score can be employed to determine suggestionsfor improvement in the allocation of services or benefits involved.

FIG. 2 sets forth a process more generally for conducting corruptionanalysis of service designs, in accordance with at least one embodimentof the invention. It should be appreciated that a process such as thatbroadly illustrated in FIG. 2 can be carried out on essentially anysuitable computer system or set of computer systems, which may, by wayof an illustrative and on-restrictive example, include a system such asthat indicated at 12′ in FIG. 3. In accordance with an exampleembodiment, most if not all of the process steps discussed with respectto FIG. 2 can be performed by way a processing unit or units and systemmemory such as those indicated, respectively, at 16′ and 28′ in FIG. 3.

As shown in FIG. 2, a service design is accepted (202). Corruptingfactors within the service design are assessed (204), and a corruptionsusceptibility score is generated (206). An alternative service designis generated responsive to a corruption susceptibility score fulfillingpredetermined criteria (208).

Referring now to FIG. 3, a schematic of an example of a cloud computingnode is shown. Cloud computing node 10′ is only one example of asuitable cloud computing node and is not intended to suggest anylimitation as to the scope of use or functionality of embodiments of theinvention described herein. Regardless, cloud computing node 10′ iscapable of being implemented and/or performing any of the functionalityset forth hereinabove. In accordance with embodiments of the invention,computing node 10′ may not necessarily even be part of a cloud networkbut instead could be part of another type of distributed or othernetwork, or could represent a stand-alone node. For the purposes ofdiscussion and illustration, however, node 10′ is variously referred toherein as a “cloud computing node”.

In cloud computing node 10′ there is a computer system/server 12′, whichis operational with numerous other general purpose or special purposecomputing system environments or configurations. Examples of well-knowncomputing systems, environments, and/or configurations that may besuitable for use with computer system/server 12′ include, but are notlimited to, personal computer systems, server computer systems, thinclients, thick clients, hand-held or laptop devices, multiprocessorsystems, microprocessor-based systems, set top boxes, programmableconsumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputer systems, mainframecomputer systems, and distributed cloud computing environments thatinclude any of the above systems or devices, and the like.

Computer system/server 12′ may be described in the general context ofcomputer system-executable instructions, such as program modules, beingexecuted by a computer system. Generally, program modules may includeroutines, programs, objects, components, logic, data structures, and soon that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract datatypes. Computer system/server 12′ may be practiced in distributed cloudcomputing environments where tasks are performed by remote processingdevices that are linked through a communications network. In adistributed cloud computing environment, program modules may be locatedin both local and remote computer system storage media including memorystorage devices.

As shown in FIG. 3, computer system/server 12′ in cloud computing node10 is shown in the form of a general-purpose computing device. Thecomponents of computer system/server 12′ may include, but are notlimited to, at least one processor or processing unit 16′, a systemmemory 28′, and a bus 18′ that couples various system componentsincluding system memory 28′ to processor 16′.

Bus 18′ represents at least one of any of several types of busstructures, including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheralbus, an accelerated graphics port, and a processor or local bus usingany of a variety of bus architectures. By way of example, and notlimitation, such architectures include Industry Standard Architecture(ISA) bus, Micro Channel Architecture (MCA) bus, Enhanced ISA (EISA)bus, Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) local bus, andPeripheral Component Interconnects (PCI) bus.

Computer system/server 12′ typically includes a variety of computersystem readable media. Such media may be any available media that isaccessible by computer system/server 12′, and it includes both volatileand non-volatile media, removable and non-removable media.

System memory 28′ can include computer system readable media in the formof volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) 30′ and/or cachememory 32′. Computer system/server 12′ may further include otherremovable/non-removable, volatile/non-volatile computer system storagemedia. By way of example only, storage system 34′ can be provided forreading from and writing to a non-removable, non-volatile magnetic media(not shown and typically called a “hard drive”). Although not shown, amagnetic disk drive for reading from and writing to a removable,non-volatile magnetic disk (e.g., a “floppy disk”), and an optical diskdrive for reading from or writing to a removable, non-volatile opticaldisk such as a CD-ROM, DVD-ROM or other optical media can be provided.In such instances, each can be connected to bus 18′ by at least one datamedia interface. As will be further depicted and described below, memory28′ may include at least one program product having a set (e.g., atleast one) of program modules that are configured to carry out thefunctions of embodiments of the invention.

Program/utility 40′, having a set (at least one) of program modules 42′,may be stored in memory 28′ by way of example, and not limitation, aswell as an operating system, at least one application program, otherprogram modules, and program data. Each of the operating system, atleast one application program, other program modules, and program dataor some combination thereof, may include an implementation of anetworking environment. Program modules 42′ generally carry out thefunctions and/or methodologies of embodiments of the invention asdescribed herein.

Computer system/server 12′ may also communicate with at least oneexternal device 14′ such as a keyboard, a pointing device, a display24′, etc.; at least one device that enable a user to interact withcomputer system/server 12; and/or any devices (e.g., network card,modem, etc.) that enable computer system/server 12′ to communicate withat least one other computing device. Such communication can occur viaI/O interfaces 22′. Still yet, computer system/server 12′ cancommunicate with at least one network such as a local area network(LAN), a general wide area network (WAN), and/or a public network (e.g.,the Internet) via network adapter 20′. As depicted, network adapter 20′communicates with the other components of computer system/server 12′ viabus 18′. It should be understood that although not shown, other hardwareand/or software components could be used in conjunction with computersystem/server 12′. Examples, include, but are not limited to: microcode,device drivers, redundant processing units, external disk drive arrays,RAID systems, tape drives, and data archival storage systems, etc.

It should be noted that aspects of the invention may be embodied as asystem, method or computer program product. Accordingly, aspects of theinvention may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, anentirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software,micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardwareaspects that may all generally be referred to herein as a “circuit,”“module” or “system.” Furthermore, aspects of the invention may take theform of a computer program product embodied in at least one computerreadable medium having computer readable program code embodied thereon.

Any combination of at least one computer readable medium may beutilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signalmedium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer readablestorage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic,magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system,apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. Morespecific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer readablestorage medium would include the following: an electrical connectionhaving at least one wire, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, arandom access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasableprogrammable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber,a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storagedevice, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. In the context of this document, a computer readable storagemedium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or store a programfor use by or in connection with an instruction execution system,apparatus, or device.

A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signalwith computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, inbaseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may takeany of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to,electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. Acomputer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium thatis not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate,propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmittedusing any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless,wire line, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination ofthe foregoing.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of theinvention may be written in any combination of at least one programminglanguage, including an object oriented programming language such asJava®, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional proceduralprogramming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similarprogramming languages. The program code may execute entirely on theuser's computer (device), partly on the user's computer, as astand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partlyon a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. Inthe latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user'scomputer through any type of network, including a local area network(LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to anexternal computer (for example, through the Internet using an InternetService Provider).

Aspects of the invention are described herein with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions maybe provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, specialpurpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus toproduce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via theprocessor of the computer or other programmable data processingapparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified inthe flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.

These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computerreadable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable dataprocessing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particularmanner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readablemedium produce an article of manufacture including instructions whichimplement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer,other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, otherprogrammable apparatus or other devices to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer or other programmable apparatus provide processes forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

This disclosure has been presented for purposes of illustration anddescription but is not intended to be exhaustive or limiting. Manymodifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skillin the art. The embodiments were chosen and described in order toexplain principles and practical application, and to enable others ofordinary skill in the art to understand the disclosure for variousembodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particularuse contemplated.

Although illustrative embodiments of the invention have been describedherein with reference to the accompanying drawings, it is to beunderstood that the embodiments of the invention are not limited tothose precise embodiments, and that various other changes andmodifications may be affected therein by one skilled in the art withoutdeparting from the scope or spirit of the disclosure.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method comprising: accepting a service design;assessing corrupting factors within the service design; generating acorruption susceptibility score; and generating an alternative servicedesign responsive to a corruption susceptibility score fulfillingpredetermined criteria.
 2. The method according to claim 1, furthercomprising developing corrective suggestions for developing subsequentservice designs.
 3. The method according to claim 1, wherein saidgenerating of an alternative service design comprises consulting ahistorical database.
 4. The method according to claim 3, wherein saidconsulting comprises accessing service design components contributing toa compliant corruption susceptibility score.
 5. The method according toclaim 3, wherein said generating of an alternative service designfurther comprises consulting a corruption pattern database.
 6. Themethod according to claim 1, wherein said generating of an alternativeservice design comprises consulting a corruption pattern database. 7.The method according to claim 1, wherein said assessing comprisesconsulting a corruption pattern database.
 8. The method according toclaim 1, wherein said assessing comprises consulting a policy database.9. The method according to claim 8, wherein said assessing furthercomprises consulting a corruption pattern database.
 10. The methodaccording to claim 1, wherein the corruption susceptibility scoreincludes a component of categorizing beneficiaries of a service.
 11. Themethod according to claim 1, wherein the corruption susceptibility scoreincludes a component of categorizing a mode of targeting a service tobeneficiaries.
 12. The method according to claim 1, wherein thecorruption susceptibility score includes a component of determiningverifiability of identification criteria.